This is the version of the script that I have revised – I have made some changes so that a sense of mystery is created , due to the fact that in the old script some crucial elements of the narrative were revealed too early and that rids the film of its suspense.
URL : https://hautlieucreative.co.uk/film20ib/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2019/06/A-Woman-Alone-script-1.docx
Auteur theory is the idea that the director is the major creative force in creating a film and this means that any film bears the unmistakable stamp of its director.
The Maltese Falcon would not be considered to be an auteur film by the standards of the 1940’s due to the fact that it was produced by a major studio (Warner Bros) and that it conforms to all of the cliches that are typical of the genre – the filmmakers were also working within the constraints of the Hays Code which was the set of industry moral guidelines that was applied to most United States motion pictures released by major studios from 1930 to 1968 , and this meant that the filmmakers could not show certain subjects within their films and this links to the way that the filmmakers only hint at Joel Cairo’s sexuality.
However , Blade Runner is not an entirely an Auteur film due to the fact that it is not entirely Ridley Scott’s original vision , as there were multiple directors and writers who were attached to the project before Scott took control of the project – but the sci – fi hallmarks that are typical of Scott’s work are present in Blade Runner so this film is immediately identifiable as one of Scott’s films , so it could be argued that Blade Runner is an Auteur film – Blade Runner is more of an auteur film than the Maltese Falcon because at the time of its release , it presented an original vision of the world to the audience while the Maltese Falcon was unoriginal at the time due to the fact that film noir was already a popular genre.
Lighting is very simple within Dr Caligari as it mainly involves the stark yet deliberate contrast off dark against light and black against white. A prime example of this comes from the makeup of Cesare. As I previously explained, black is used to represent darkness and evil within his character; that of the implication that he is a murderer by the unreliable narrator of Francis. The remarkably white tint of his face stands out sharply against the black hair, makeup and background. White and black are interesting colours to contrast because they are considered opposites; innocence and evil representatives. The surrounding of darkness suggests that Cesare is being affected by evil and this malevolence is slowly spreading. This interpretation can be considered corrupted by Francis’ warped mind which makes us question everything.
Shadows are actually used to show Cesare killing Alan. Throughout the film, we see Cesare as a dark, twisted character. However, by not actually showing him murder Alan, and instead using his shadows; we are given the implication or perhaps foreshadowing that he is not actually a murderer. But by this point, we do not know this so we assume that he is this evil, dark character. Murdering Alan in darkness and hidden by shadows serves as a good representation of Cesare as a dark character himself. We are led to believe this because the darkness hides his true character. Visually, the shadows contrast against the limited lighting to show the audience exactly what is happening. I don’t think the murder would be as effective if shown in broad daylight because by this, we never actually see Cesare do it; this shows that he is not truly evil to the point where Francis’ twisted memory cannot even conjure the image of him murdering Alan
Another main focus of lighting, is that of the contrast between light and dark. Most of the characters wear black, or dark colours aside from Jane. This stands out against the brighter lights and interior designs which are typically white or grey as seen in the picture. Since the characters are usually depicted in darkness, we get the assumption that Francis perceives others as evil and not to be trusted. Since we are watching the film from his ‘flashbacks’, we assume that he is telling the truth. However, his deranged world is fiction and the characters shown in darkness are simply reimagined people from his environment. The contrast is significant to show the clear difference between the characters and the set. This can be derived from the idea that although the people themselves are real their characters created by Francis were not and we are actually not viewing an environment but instead trapped inside the warped mind of Francis
Since the film is filmed entirely within a studio, there is also the idea that there is no access to the real world and the characters are trapped within this hellish nightmare. Fear is a main feelings imposed upon the audience by the unnatural approach to the set. This is very significant in setting the mood for the rest of the film and suggesting that the characters are trapped within this world. We are given a look into the mind of Francis from his perspective since we did not know that his story is fabricated. However, this separate world is disrupted by the elements of normalcy shown through certain sets such as that of Jane’s house. This is a shortened and edited version of the essay, the rest can be found on the blog not in the film role 2 category*
The editing within Dr Caligari is unique and innovative because it reflects the unsettling atmosphere of the film. Iris wipes are frequently used to make the transition between scenes much smoother which continues the fraught tension. This technique is adapted and utilised throughout the film’s entirety and many versions are used. In this particular scene, a diamond shaped iris wipe is used to unsettle the audience by showing Cesare. Since we can only see him within the setting, fear is successfully achieved because everything else is blacked out. A fade is used to cut in and out of the scene, giving a smooth transition which is significant in retaining the tension created by the dark, ghoulish lighting. In this particular sense, the iris wipe is vital in keeping the scene as fluid as possible since it can be considered one of the most anticipated and exciting scenes so needs to run smooth. Since we are engaged in the film, the idea of darkness surrounding us ensures verisimilitude because not only does it make us feel part of the film but it represents how we are viewing the film from Francis’ mind and observing his story.
However, iris wipes are also used to represent a flashback. When Francis; the narrator retells the story of the fair, an iris wipe is used immediately after to physically show us a difference in scene which can represent the time period difference; signalling a flashback. The cut emphasises that this is a flashback because the camera’s iris is shut slowly then re-opened. This can represent the reopening of Francis’ ‘memories’ to narrate what happened that day. The physical change in scenes reminds us that there will be clear differences because we can see the change on screen between both the two scenes but also the different time frames. This is vital in showing that there is a clear difference to not confuse the audience as to whether the flashback is actually happening now. This the film does not follow a clear linear, and the flashback demonstrates that there is a time difference. The fluidity of this transition was very significant to show that there is actually a difference because it should not confuse the audience.
There is a lack of intercutting within the whole film due to the difficulty occurring with manual cutting, changing and addition of the film. This meant that it relied on fades and iris wipes to smoothly transition each scene to the next which was important for a horror film but especially for one which builds up tension. However, since the film is silent there are period where scenes cut to title cards which narrate and explain what is going on. This gives us background knowledge and also separates each scene clearly which is useful to ensure that the audience know what is happening and when. This is important because it ensures that we fully understand Francis’ story. As he is the narrator, we trust everything that he tells us without the dialogue to prove this.
Shots vary in length to keep the audiences engaged. For example, when Cesare is first introduced to the audience; the shot lingers on Dr Caligari and Cesare to ensure that the audience realize how significant the characters are. There is also the element of delaying the anticipation, as the audience eagerly await to see how the onscreen audience will react to Cesare. But the shot is dragged out so the tension builds as the audience continue to wait for the reaction. However, when it finally cuts to the audience, the frame only lasts a few seconds before flitting back to Caligari and Cesare. This could perhaps represent the significance of the two characters by getting the audience to focus on them. This is an edited and shortened version of the essay because of the high word count, the rest ids avaibile on my blog but not for film role 1 category*
The jerking, sometimes hard to follow visual style is interesting because it continues the abrupt, jarring editing style within the film. Since this represents Michel’s character, we can assume that he is not behaving rationally because the camera style is shaky and out of control, perhaps representing his wild and careless thoughts.
Monologues were not typically common at the time, during the year of release, there were many French drama and crime films produced which led to the need for diversity. Many films, such as ‘The Hole’ (1960, by Jacques Becker) utilise action and short shots to keep the audience on the edge of their seat. Whereas Breathless breaks this convention and uses long shots to ensure verisimilitude by keeping the audience fully engaged and ready for what will happen next. Although the sequences and shots seem sometimes unnecessarily long, they keep a chatty and unique element to the film which makes it so influential
Another innovative technique used by Godard is the lack of colour stock in favour for black and white. This creates a unique effect by setting Breathless apart from the other films which were typically in colour at the time. Although colour film was still very expensive in the 1950’s, more popular films were beginning to use it. This technique may seem intentional as Godard may just be using black and white to save money, but the lack of colour can represent the honesty of the film because it does not hold back.
One of the most arguably innovative editing aspects of Breathless is the jump cuts which seem quite random but help to elevate the film and give it character. An example of this comes from the opening scene, where Michel converses with a woman getting changed. As the scene continues, jump cuts are frequently used to join random fragments of the scene together. Sometimes, this does not necessarily make sense but keeps the audience fully engaged and on edge because they are interested due to the unawareness of what will happen next.
This scene in particular draws the audience in immediately because they want to know what will happen next. By using such random jump cuts, they are kept on their edge of their seat at all times and aware that anything could happen next. Although they seem aimless and very random, they play a pivotal role and purpose in retaining a methodical, yet chaotic and sometimes messy pace of the film. Jump cuts are also used to represent the reckless nature of Michel. After shooting the police officer, a jump cut is used to show him carelessly driving in Paris. This abrupt change can show that he does not care about getting caught and the chaotic jump cut used to transition the scenes can represent his careless nature. Since Michel kills the officer for almost no apparent reason, this careless behaviour is reflected in the editing style as an abrupt and considered unnecessary jump cut is used to transition scene. This is significant because it develops Michel’s character
In general, the editing style of Godard influences the drop in continuity editing in favour for jump cuts, longer shots and a wider focus for cinematography and editing opposed to narrative and plots. This has an interesting impact on films because it sets them apart from similar genres and plots by ensuring a unique visual style and look.
At the time, most popular Hollywood films adopted a typical, continuity style of editing. Godard breaks this convention right at the start of the film which begins with alternating shots of a close-up of Michel and another close-up of a woman. By using close-ups, we get the impression that the characters are positioned close to each other because of the proximity we are viewing them from. However as wide shots are introduced instead, we see that they are positioned quite distant. This may confuse viewers, who are used to the simple and easily perceivable style of continuity editing used by many Hollywood films. Another unique element of Breathless’ editing is the varying shot length. Certain films adopt a usual shot style, by utilizing fast cuts to break up shots or slow, drawn out shots which build tension. This is a shortened and edited version of the essay, the full version remains on the blog*
Scene 1:
INT – DAY – LOUNGE
Two characters – 1 and 2 – are seen lying on a couch fast asleep, the rubbish from what seemed to be a party litter the room. Suddenly the doorbell buzzes very loudly and wakes both characters up. 1 however tries to fall back asleep and so 2 gets up and answers the door.
handheld shots give the idea of the camera being a person – helps the audience relate to the situation and the jokes, zooms and pulls and pushes also represent a human eye looking at specific things and give off a comedic effect.
camera MS follows someone walking up to house, zooms in on the window
cuts to see the 2 characters sitting on the couch, it pans to see crisp packets and cups on the floor and table and around the room then it pans back to the characters and zooms on their face. One of them groans and moves a little
cuts to person outside stepping up to the door.
back inside, doorbell buzzes and they both wake up very suddenly, zoom in on 2 getting up to get the door, follows him as he leaves the room then pans back to look at character 1 trying to fall back asleep
“Ah hello I’m Mr 3, 1’s Landlord, is he in?”
zooms in on 1 as his eyes open suddenly with an extremely shocked and worried look on his face.
A hand from out of scene gives 2 a note. When opened it reads – ‘I’M NOT HERE – in a rushed and messy handwriting. 2 stands close to the door so as to block view into the house, however not completely.
From 2’s perspective, hand appears as if out of nowhere (from lounge) and sticks out for a bit. then cut to 3’s perspective, the hand still sticking out, it shakes a bit to get 2’s attention then 2 takes it and says thanks without taking his eyes off of 3. cut to 2’s perspective, zoom in on 3 then zoom out and focus on the note.
back to 3’s perspective (shot)
“Oh you know what, he JUST left for work”
right after saying this 1 rushes across frame
back to 2’s perspective. (reverse shot)
Mr 3:
“was that-“
Shot:
“ahhh no that was just someone from the party last night”
reverse shot:
“PARTY?! oh no there is no parties allowed and 1 knows this, i definitely need to speak to him now.”
shot: camera slightly stepped back
“Oh no don’t worry we didn’t have the party here, we…. used the neighbours house ?”
shot: zooms in on 2 realising what he just said
“You broke into the Taylor’s house?! That’s highly Illegal-”
shot
a loud bang and “Ow” from the side of the frame that 1 disappeared to interrupts Mr 3
“right let me see right now”
camera zooms in on 2 looking very worries, then zooms out and follows 3 as he walks into the house and turns the corner.
Mr 3 walks into the house only to see 1 peeking out of a small cupboard, 2 quickly sits on the cupboard, shutting 1 in so he cannot be seen followed by another “OW” from 1.
camera sees 2 sit down on the bench / cupboard then zooms in on 3’s face to see his anger and mixed with confusion.
2:
“See? Nothing”
Mr 3 stutters a bit in confusion
To what extent have modern science fiction films changed since the birth of the genre, shown with The War of the Worlds (dir. Byron Haskin, 1953) and The World’s End (dir. Edgar Wright, 2013)?
Elements of Science Fiction
– stories often tell about science and technology of the future
– stories are grounded in science
– characters can include robots, aliens, creatures, etc
– conflicts tend to center around technology or issues with society
– stories often explore potential consequences of scientific innovations
– stories can be set in outer space, other worlds and parallel universes
– there are often features of biology, including enhanced humans
– stories can feature paranormal elements, such as telekinesis
– stories can often be allegorical or have hidden meanings
War of the Worlds
This film is set in 1953 California, when the Earth is suddenly invaded by Martians. They start to destroy cities across the world, and the people are powerless to stop them. The narrative follows the character of Dr Clayton Forrester, who tries to survive the attacks while finding a way to kill the Martians. In the end, the Martians are killed off by bacteria in the Earth’s atmosphere, as they had no resistance to it.
This film follows traditional conventions of science-fiction, as the narrative surrounds an alien invasion of Earth.
The World’s End
The film follows five friends as they attempt a pub crawl in their hometown of Newton Haven. They soon discover that the whole town has been replaced by androids, and they carry on the pub crawl in an attempt to remain undetected. Eventually, the androids find them, and the five try to escape while continuing the pub crawl. The two main characters, Gary and Andy, find the androids’ hiding place and confront them. The androids then leave Earth, but create an electromagnetic pulse that sends the planet back to the Dark Ages.